Mine was shipped late last week according to CSS. Hope to be seeing them soon.
My first plan is to install them on a loudspeaker cab from a garage sale. This will be my test, the measurment and the run-in rig.
My first plan is to install them on a loudspeaker cab from a garage sale. This will be my test, the measurment and the run-in rig.
The roundovers on the sides are 1/2" and the top and bottom roundovers are 1/4". The port is about 4" long. The enclosures were made according to the specifications on planet_10's site. The speakers are about 10" from the wall and the desk is in the corner of the room so I think that I am going to end up putting a little bit of stuffing in the ports or using some active eq. to tone down the bass. However, they sound very good in this configuration and when placed in a proper farfield setup. Good job to CSS! 😎
I think front ported would be best if the speakers are placed withing 3 feet of the rear wall. Mine are 32 inches from rear wall and are still making serious bass 😀
I think that you would be right about the front port for most applications. But I weighed my options and decided that a rear port would give me the most freedom by allowing me to stuff it or completely plug it off without having to look at the port all the time. Right now, I have a very light packing of polyfill in the ports and they sound pretty good. No exagerated boomyness and good extension.
Hobie said:
I put some polyfill stuffing in there. I don't have anything else on hand to line the walls. Any suggestions?
There's an insulation used in HVAC that has a shiny metallic side attached to R6. This stuff is GREAT for speakers and can be bnought in small rolls at your hardware store (I see your Canadian too. Try Rona/Revy or Home Hardware). Use contact cement to glue it on (the fibre side outwards) or silicone caulk 🙂
I couldn't let this one pass unnoticed...
YES, absolutely.
Multiple D/A and A/D conversions, dynamics compression, digital normalization, MP3...
Yup, it's worse and worse.
FM sounded much better up to the end of the 80's.
And hey, stick with FM. DAB is worse.
Although DAB only affects some european countries and those techno-junkies that always like to buy the 'last thing'.
😀
PS: digital TV, anyone?
SCREEM said:
YES, absolutely.
Multiple D/A and A/D conversions, dynamics compression, digital normalization, MP3...
Yup, it's worse and worse.
FM sounded much better up to the end of the 80's.
And hey, stick with FM. DAB is worse.
Although DAB only affects some european countries and those techno-junkies that always like to buy the 'last thing'.
😀
PS: digital TV, anyone?
Carlos,
I get one FM station up on the mountain -- and it is an excellent one. If you want to get a poor taste, it is available on-line (http://www.kplu.org). In a recent trial, the "close to CD" quality asn't even close to the via antenna feed.
dave
I get one FM station up on the mountain -- and it is an excellent one. If you want to get a poor taste, it is available on-line (http://www.kplu.org). In a recent trial, the "close to CD" quality asn't even close to the via antenna feed.
dave
Vikash said:Surely you jest about digital tv Carlos. Terrestrial and analogue cable stinks over here.
Not here.
I'm very 'sensitive' to digital compression, and the more channels they pack on a single frequency, the worse it gets.
Digital artifacts are very easy to detect on the image.
In fact, on most 'top' analog TV sets (CRTs included) there are artifacts, because the 100Hz picture is generated in the digital domain and the compression is clear as water.
A constant blurring of the image, if you look closer.
Close-ups on football matches show a grass that is just a blurry green, it is not defined, it's like a green blanket.
My big old Philips TV will last until it rottens-up, because most of the things available today (and $$$$ ones) are a complete downgrade.
Back to speakers, very nice ones here.😎
planet10 said:
On my area I get two radio stations that don't sound bad at all.
One of them sounds very good indeed.
The lucky thing (for me) is that they play good music, mostly at night.
Just listening.
Now... these are exceptions, because I can get around 30 radio stations, with good reception conditions.
What I mean is that even the commercial ones (pop/rock) sounded decent up to around the end of the 80's, and they all sound very bad now.
planet10 said:
I weep for you
You miss some of the best from Seattle for speaker testing: KING-FM, KWJZ as well as a static free KPLU.
Can you at least get CBC?
Geek said:
I can get French CBC. I can get KING too, but am very happy with KPLU so i just leave it there most of the time.
dave
I'm actually tring to decide myself which way to go when building.
As I understand it (I'm a newbie, lurker reading) you line a ported enclose and stuff a sealed enclosure. I have some ashphalt impregnated felt that I was going to use if I went ported. I also have some convoluted foam available as well.
I tried modeling the 7l cabinet ported and sealed in WinIsd and it seemed in my models the sealed had less of a "hump" between 100hz and the -3dB point.
I'm going to build 7 identical speakers for a HT application and am not too worried about the lowest bass as the sub is there for that role.
I'm tempted to build sealed and if I don't like the response, I can cut ports into the rear, tuning it to 50Hz, 1.5"x 4.17"
I'm not sure how you sealed your driver to the cabinet, but possibly feeding a piece of convoluted foam through the driver opening may help tame the bass output. I read about guys sticking nerf footballs in to their ports on the their subs to plug the port.
Stuart
As I understand it (I'm a newbie, lurker reading) you line a ported enclose and stuff a sealed enclosure. I have some ashphalt impregnated felt that I was going to use if I went ported. I also have some convoluted foam available as well.
I tried modeling the 7l cabinet ported and sealed in WinIsd and it seemed in my models the sealed had less of a "hump" between 100hz and the -3dB point.
I'm going to build 7 identical speakers for a HT application and am not too worried about the lowest bass as the sub is there for that role.
I'm tempted to build sealed and if I don't like the response, I can cut ports into the rear, tuning it to 50Hz, 1.5"x 4.17"
I'm not sure how you sealed your driver to the cabinet, but possibly feeding a piece of convoluted foam through the driver opening may help tame the bass output. I read about guys sticking nerf footballs in to their ports on the their subs to plug the port.
Stuart
I want a pair of those FR125S in the nice 7L planet 10 cabs with the port below the driver rather than in back. They should make outstanding nearfield desktop computer speakers. 
I also like the AE SL-10 in a flat sealed 25L 6" deep x 17"x17" desktop sub behind my 19" LCD monitor.
I also like the AE SL-10 in a flat sealed 25L 6" deep x 17"x17" desktop sub behind my 19" LCD monitor.
audioaficionado said:
Note: the 7 litre design is Dan Wiggin's not mine. I prefer 13 litres which makes a nice sealed, or aperiodic, or semi-Aperiodic BR box. Might be a bit big for a computer set-up thou. Sitting on a desk near field you may well (actually i'd say highly likely) that a BR has WAY too much bass. I'd go 4-13 liters aperiodic myself.
dave
Too much bass from those speakers won't be a problem unless it's distorted. I plan on having the sub right behind the monitor anyway so I'll cross them at ~75Hz. I could always try the B&W port hole foam plug trick if they're too boomy.planet10 said:
audioaficionado said:
That trick has been around since long before B&W was even a gleam in someone's eyes...
dave
- Status
- Not open for further replies.